Christening of Prince George of Cambridge: October 23, 2013

[Dman]

Well, it's not too long on us finding out who George's Godparents will be.

 

[HereditaryPrincess]

Prince George christening: Royals Anne and Sophie left off guest list | Mail Online

Some senior members of the Royal Family have not been invited to Prince George’s christening this month because his parents want it to be an ‘intimate, family affair’, the Daily Mail has learnt.

Prince William’s aunts, Princess Anne and Sophie, Countess of Wessex, have been left off the guest list, the Mail was told last night.

And although Buckingham Palace refused to comment, it seems George’s great-uncles, Prince Andrew and Prince Edward, are also not attending the hugely anticipated event on October 23.

Before I'd read the bottom paragraph about Princes Andrew and Edward not attending either, I was going to say that Prince Edward could go instead of Sophie and take Louise and James with him. As Princess Anne isn't attending, I wonder if Peter and Autumn and Zara and Mike will attend, although I have my doubts.

I knew that Sophie had an engagement on the day of George's christening, but I was quite surprised to read that neither she or Edward will attend as I think the Wessexes are close to the Cambridges. I had a feeling that Anne might not attend because at the time of George's birth she made a comment which was something along the lines of "it's nothing to do with me, but thanks".

IMO those who will defiantly be on the guest list are:

- HM and Prince Philip
- Charles and Camilla
- Harry (and possibly Cressida)
- Carole and Michael Middleton
- Pippa
- James
- Prince George's godparents

 

[BrazilianEmpire]

- Harry (and possibly Cressida)

That would be interesting.

I would like to see Cressida at the christening, but I'm not sure she'll attend.

 

[HereditaryPrincess]

That would be interesting.

I would like to see Cressida at the christening, but I'm not sure she'll attend.

I have my doubts about Cressida's attendance too, but I agree it would be nice if she made an appearance with Harry.

 

[GracieGiraffe]

... I had a feeling that Anne might not attend because at the time of George's birth she made a comment which was something along the lines of "it's nothing to do with me, but thanks"...

Well, Anne is nothing if not blunt, that's certain.

I'm wondering if her comment came out the wrong way - did she really mean, "I deserve no congratulations here, I had nothing to do with his birth."

Certainly some interesting commentary in the DM, which tends to heavily moderate and only allow certain ones in. Sometimes positive, sometimes negative. There seems to be a lot of commentary blaming Kate for this decision. What makes anyone think it's not Will, the royal, who is the dominant partner in this relationship? I certainly think he is. I think ultimate decisions, such as guest lists, etc, are his. I'll go out on a limb and guess that the list of godparents are reflective predominantly of his choices not hers.

I think the fact of the matter is that Will and Kate are far closer to the Middletons than they are to the Windsors. Watch the wedding video. The only person with whom Will engaged in friendly discourse (or any discourse) was Kate's dad at the altar. The Queen Mother's memorial service found Will and Kate on vacation (was it with her family?). This past Easter and Christmas were spent with the Middletons. They as a couple are closer to the Middletons, fair enough, but I do think that the aunts and uncles who work tirelessly to ensure George's birthright should be at this ceremony, or at least should have been extended an invitation.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

The only thing that I'm getting from this is that people want the British Royals to change their tradition of private Christening because the Continental Royal do Public, Television broadcast Christening

Actually, only the Scandinavian Royals(Norway,Denmark,Sweden) and the Netherlands do lavish and televised public christenings. In the Catholic Royal families of Spain, Belgium and Luxembourg, baptisms are even more private and low key than the Brits.

 

[BritishRoyalist]

I never saw anything wrong with Princess Anne Comment after Prince George Birth. It just came out wrong but I understood what she meant.

It would kind of be like congratulating my Aunt on the birth of a Great Nephew or Niece (she already has a couple)

Usually congratulations are kept for Patents, Grandparents, Great Grandparents and New Aunts and Uncles of the child.

Although it it nice to compliment a Great Aunts or uncles or well but Anne was probably thinking 'I am just the Great Aunt' Does Anne have any Great Nieces or Nephews from Timothy side?

I don't think she meant to be ride and that was never her intentions but she probably was thinking "why congratulate me? Congratulations should go to William & Catherine, Harry, Pippa Charles, Middletons, The Queen and Prince Philip not me"

I am sure she called William and congratulated him on the birth of his first Child and again when she first saw George and behind Close doors it a safe bet she was one happy aunt and thrilled for William and Catherine and for Charles on the birth of his first grandchild

 

[miche]

Actually, only the Scandinavian Royals(Norway,Denmark,Sweden) and the Netherlands do lavish and televised public christenings. In the Catholic Royal families of Spain, Belgium and Luxembourg, baptisms are even more private and low key than the Brits.

How so? They don't release pictures? I don't see how they can be more low key than the Brits when they do the same things as the Brits which is release professional photos of the Baptism

 

[US Royal Watcher]

At this point, we still don't know who is or isn't invited. I'm going back and forth on how William and Catherine should handle it. I'm sympathetic to the argument that the parents have the right to limit the guest list to a few close friends and family. There is also the argument that the christening should be a big occasion with senior royals because George may inherit the throne one day. There is also the consideration of how it will look to the public if William and Catherine exclude particular people (William dislikes the royal family, William is shirking his royal duties, etc....)

But setting aside these arguments, I hope William and Catherine consider how senior royals will feel if they are not invited. If Andrew, Edward, Anne, the Kents, and the Gloucesters, and various cousins would only look at this as an obligation, don't invite them. But if they would feel hurt, their feelings should matter too. As Marengo said upthread, having a few more people should add more joy to the occasion, rather than detract from it.

I didn't always understood that when I was younger. I didn't grow up around my grandparents, aunts, and uncles, so it never occurred to me to invite my extended family to my kids' birthday parties until I went to a friend's house for a child's birthday and saw how happy her mother was. After that, I invited my family and I am truly happy I did. My father is gone now and my kids have some great memories and pictures. Now, I have a brother-in-law who has no children and my mother is a widow. I hope my kids ensure they are included in big events in their lives, even if it means that they have to expand the guest list beyond what their ideal.

I guess what I am saying is that William and Catherine have the right to make decisions based on what they want, but part of being a family means that you have to also consider other people. I get the feeling that the Queen and Prince Charles are not trying to interfere in William's decisions. I hope that William responds by taking their wishes and feelings into consideration.

 

[cepe]

Start with the basic fact that the royals NEVER cancel prior public engagements for private family occasions.

Then we need to understand that as far as the BRF are concerned the christening is a private family occasion (same as the Royal Wedding. I know the ceremony was filmed but little else was and the approach to the guest list (invite who you want first) says it all).

The priority for this occasion was the availability of The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh.

Next the availability of Charles/Camilla and Michael/Carole.

Th availability of Godparents comes next BUT there is a history of some not being available in the past and they have still been godparents.

After that friends and family (in that order as per the wedding).

They are not required to do as per the DM, Telegraph or any other media outlet say. They are not breaking any traditions. The Times today said that the Music Room is were future kings traditionally get christened. I can think of one - Charles. The media are just making it up in order to get hits on their websites.

William and Catherine are planning the christening they want for their first child. As they should.

 

[BrazilianEmpire]

The Times today said that the Music Room is were future kings traditionally get christened. I can think of one - Charles.

Prince William was also christened at the Music Room.

 

[cepe]

Prince William was also christened at the Music Room.

oops! Thank you. But I still dont think 2 makes a tradition.

 

[BrazilianEmpire]

oops! Thank you. But I still dont think 2 makes a tradition.

I agree.

Seems that there's no tradional venue for the christening of a future Monarch.

 

[Spheno]

From Royal Musings: Royal Baptism: Prince George of Cambridge:
Here is a list of other royal baptisms:

Queen Victoria: Cupola Room at Kensington Palace. June 24, 1819

Princess Mary Adelaide of Cambridge at Cambridge House, Hanover, January 9, 1834 (mother of Queen Mary, consort of George V)

Princess Victoria: Throne Room, Buckingham Palace February 10, 1841
Edward VII: St. George's Chapel, Windsor. January 25, 1842
Princess Alice: Private Chapel, Buckingham Palace, June 2, 1843
Prince Alfred: Private Chapel, Windsor Castle, September 6, 1844
Princess Helena: Private Chapel, Buckingham Palace, July 25 1846
Princess Louise, Private Chapel, Buckingham Palace, May 13, 1848
Prince Arthur, Private Chapel, Buckingham Palace, June 22, 1850
Prince Leopold. Private Chapel, Buckingham Palace, June 28, 1853
Princess Beatrice, Private Chapel, Buckingham Palace, June 16, 1857

Prince Albert Victor, Duke of Clarence: Private Chapel, Buckingham Palace, March 10, 1864

King George V: Private Chapel, Windsor Castle: July 7, 1865
Queen Mary: Private Chapel, Kensington Palace, July 27, 1867

Princess Louise: Marlborough House, May 10, 1867
Princess Victoria: Marlborough House, August 6, 1868
Princess Maud: Marlborough House, December 24, 1869

Edward VIII: White Lodge, Richmond Park, July 16, 1894
George VI: St. Mary Magdalene Church, Sandringham, February 10, 1896
Princess Mary: St. Mary Magdalene Church, Sandringham, June 7, 1897
Prince Henry: Private Chapel Windsor Castle, May 17, 1900
Prince George: Private Chapel, Windsor Castle, January 26, 1903
Prince John: St Mary Magdalene Church, August 3, 1905

Queen Elizabeth II: Private Chapel, Buckingham Palace, May 29, 1926
Princess Margaret: Private Chapel, Buckingham Palace, October 30, 1930

Duke of Kent, Private Chapel, Buckingham Palace, November 20, 1935
Princess Alexandra, Private Chapel, Buckingham Palace, February 9, 1937
Prince Michael of Kent. Private Chapel, Windsor Castle, August 4, 1942
Prince William of Gloucester: Private Chapel, Windsor Castle, February 22, 1942
Duke of Gloucester: Private Chapel, Windsor Castle, October 20, 1944

The Prince of Wales: Music Room, Buckingham Palace, December 15, 1948
Princess Anne: Music Room, October 21, 1950
Prince Andrew: Music Room, April 8, 1960
Prince Edward: Private Chapel, Windsor Castle, May 2, 1964

Duke of Cambridge: Music Room, August 4, 1982
Prince Harry: St. George's Chapel, Windsor, December 21, 1984
Princess Beatrice: Chapel Royal, St. James's Palace, December 20, 1988
Princess Eugenie: St. Mary Magdalene, Sandringham, December 23, 1990
Lady Louise Windsor: Private Chapel, Windsor Castle, April 24, 2004
Viscount Severn: Private Chapel, Windsor Castle, April 19, 2008
..............

As you can see BRF don't have one special place for christening. Private Chapel in Buckingham Palace was destroyed by a German bomb in World War II; the Queen's Galleryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen's_Gallery was built on the site.

 

[Ish]

I wonder if the intention was for the Music Room to become the traditional christening spot, and William is going against that.

However, 2 christenings doesn't make a tradition, and I somehow doubt that the Queen or Charles are bothered by William not going with the Music Room.

 

[royalistbert]

These phrases are really beginning to annoy me "modern couple", "breaking tradition". I don't know why.

 

[Baron Brockdorf]

I see this christening will not be a grand and pompous one like the Duchess of Ostergotland had,
Prince George's christening will be a "small intimate affair" with close family and others - hellomagazine.com
but im sure it will be just as lovely

 

[Spheno]

I wonder if the intention was for the Music Room to become the traditional christening spot, and William is going against that.

However, 2 christenings doesn't make a tradition, and I somehow doubt that the Queen or Charles are bothered by William not going with the Music Room.

They stoped to use the Music Room after William's christening. The queen started to use this room and the queen was first, who changed the Music room for Windsor chapel.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I actually think that the intention was for the private chapel at BP to be the traditional place but when it was destroyed in WWII the Music Room was used with the intention of rebuilding the private chapel but by the early 60s that plan had changed so Edward was christened at Windsor and since then it has been a mish-mash.

 

[Ish]

To be fair... I think to some degree it's always been a mish-mash.

 

[soapstar]

Totally agree with your post, cepe.

I think the fact of the matter is that Will and Kate are far closer to the Middletons than they are to the Windsors. Watch the wedding video. The only person with whom Will engaged in friendly discourse (or any discourse) was Kate's dad at the altar. [/I]

Actually, William did engage in friendly discourse with someone besides Michael. When he and Harry first arrived at the Abbey, they exchanged kisses and spoke to their Spencer relatives. They also had a few words with a couple of the guests. The BRF (and the Middleton's) didn't arrive until after William and Harry. By then, the brothers were in a private room and didn't come out until Catherine started walking down the aisle. William did smile at his family when he came up the aisle, but he didn't really have a chance to talk to anyone since the wedding was starting.

As for the Christening, shouldn't we wait for the event before we start talking about whether William is shunning his family or whether this Christening is fit for a future King?

I mean, nothing has been confirmed yet and people are already in a lather. I can't imagine all of the complaints that are going to come out when the godparents, guests and the photos are actually revealed.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

As for the Christening, shouldn't we wait for the event before we start talking about whether William is shunning his family or whether this Christening is fit for a future King?

What fun would that be?

 

[Moonmaiden23]

How so? They don't release pictures? I don't see how they can be more low key than the Brits when they do the same things as the Brits which is release professional photos of the Baptism

For starters, there is usually no official release of the names of the godparents beforehand. They also don't usually release film surrounding the event for viewing to the press, but I could be wrong.

Perhaps they are not more low key than the Windsors but they certainly are just as lowkey as the Windsors, and christenings are not nearly as lavish as they are in the other countries I named.

 

[Erin9]

These phrases are really beginning to annoy me "modern couple", "breaking tradition". I don't know why.

They bug me a bit, too. lol I think it's because I don't think Kate and William are truly that different. Every generation does things differently. There's nothing particularly exceptional to me about anything they've done. IOW, they're not THAT "modern" or "tradition breaking."

 

[Frelinghighness]

Naming their baby George certainly smacks of tradition, imo.

I don't think they would chose a deposed foreign royal such as Pavlos. has that been done before for future kings/queens?

 

[cepe]

Naming their baby George certainly smacks of tradition, imo.

I don't think they would chose a deposed foreign royal such as Pavlos. has that been done before for future kings/queens?

Constantine of Greece is William's godfather; William is the godfather to Pavlos son; Charles is godfather to Pavlos

 

[Frelinghighness]

Thanks, I knew William was godfather to Pavlos' son and Charles was Pavlos' godfather, I forgot that Constantine was chosen for William.

 

[fandesacs2003]

Charles is Pavlo's godfather? i did not know. The christening took place in Athens, the GRF was not yet on exile.
I would love to see a pic.

 

[BrazilianEmpire]

I don't think they would chose a deposed foreign royal such as Pavlos. has that been done before for future kings/queens?

There's no problem with deposed Royals. The deposed King Constantine II of Greece was one of Prince William's godparents.

Also, for Royalty, once you are a Royal, you'll always be one of them. Just look at the pictures of the Diamond Jubilee Sovereign's Lunch, the deposed Kings of Greece, Romania and Bulgaria had the same precedence of the reigning Monarchs.

The Duchess of Cambridge even curtseyed to the Crown Princess of Romania.

 

[Osipi]

There's no problem with deposed Royals. The deposed King Constantine II of Greece was one of Prince William's godparents.

One thing we have to keep in mind too is that the Greek royals although deposed, are also family from the Duke of Edinburgh's side of the family. I think the BRF is on very close terms with them.